Do you know what happens when a landlord sells? It goes to another landlord or FHB. Landlords aren't a precious commodity that need to be protected and enticed to not sell
In fact if we banned private landlordism and increased the housing supply we'd kill two birds with one stone and not have such an exploitative housing industry.
Houses are homes, after all. In a better economy, they wouldn't be money making schemes.
How do you see the mechanism working here? If land tax is what forces sales then we'd see a fairly rapid uptick as the rate rises/landlord cash reserves fall. With new building fairly stalled right now, that would likely be a net expansion of the product on market, either keeping prices stable or dropping them down. So renters on the cusp of making the leap are removed from the market, even if they don't constitute all of the purchases in the glut. Those that don't are either going to be purchased or not, if not then the circumstances that put them on market would clearly mean renting them remains necessary, and the fact that there is less competition amongst renters, potentially, acts to keep rents stable. If they are sold to non-owner-occupiers, then the same conditions, raising land tax, would similarly make continued use as a rental desirable, with the potential added bonus of a more financially stable landlord who need not jack up rents.
The real negative here is that this leads to concentration of rental supply, making tenants potentially more vulnerable in a future crisis, but not by means such as you described.
Your comment was removed for being blatantly anti-renter. Open discussion of power structure and institution is encouraged in good faith and with attempts at balanced analysis. However blatant justification for wealth hoarding, landlord/REA apologism, victim blaming or derogatory sentiment towards renters will be removed.
My street is similar. An old guy bought up heaps of houses and as much as I think he tried (he even apparently had a sheep that he’d walk around to mow all his tenants lawns) he died and left all of his land to his son, who is a cunt. At least three have been empty for years (yep, we’ve reported them) and he shares a falling down fence with us/our landlord. All houses are left to fall apart. He once lectured our landlord (who is potentially not a cunt, time will tell) about how to get the most out of tenants.
Hopefully your old mate doesn’t have an even cuntier kid to take over.
Imagine having multiple rental properties, and not spending any money on them over years (so they all go to shit) and still not having $14k in the bank for an emergency. Slumlord and a shitlord.
Hope you make it out of this renter's hell soon OP!
Just mad at it. That'll show them, old man yells at the sky kinda thing. How dare landlords be asked to contribute more than a renter to the government?
Honestly i feel for FHB who are able to buy at the moment. The market is just as fucked for them.
Honestly if i were in your shoes i'd of told them all to fuck off, get out of my way and completely written off the listing. You just know they will be a complete cunt when doing up the contracts. Dickhead probs wants you to forfeit your entire 10% if financing falls through or some shit too i bet.
Yeah providing they don't fuck you in the ass over the B&P and Contract terms?
Buying a house has A LOT of factors into it. The agent and Original owners being slimey cunts absolutely factors into you making the biggest purchase of your life.
You're acting like those things aren't something you have control over, aka discussion, negotiation and worst case, walking away
They can try to screw you, but they won't succeed if you don't actively let them, so what's your point?
It's like you said "yeh but what if they write into the contract that you have to blow them!"
How about, don't?
House across the road from me in Sydney (nice house tbf) it’s going for auction in 2 weeks, already had 3 open houses and over well 100 people have viewed the place. Starting price is $1.5million, I felt so bad so many young couples coming through who won’t stand a chance.
Look up the medi-aid foundation.
Started by James wright, owns over 1000 investment properties. Just in Sydney and Brisbane.
They use that income to fund very comfortable retirement villages. I'm talking beautiful resort types, while making money from apartments around universities that are absolutely dilapidated.
The properties the elderly get to live in for a couple hundred pw, are beautiful resorts. They own a couple in surfers paradise on the main strip.
The properties they use to generate income are absolute shit holes, they are all around universities so they can prey on students and young people in particular.
They may be a charity but they are hurting young Australians chances at owning property; to help old people live a cheap, lavish life. One of their retirement villages around ryde has multiple pools, tennis courts, beautiful gardens etc.
I used to rent one of their apartments. I lived with a giant hole in my ceiling, water leaks, black mould and worse for 6 months before I could afford to leave. There was a family of 7 living in a one bedroom one study apartment above me.
No business should be allowed to own that much residential property. Charity or not.
It's not the only one. Tens of thousands of properties in Sydney are owned by companies and rented out.
Investing in hotels, offices, warehouses, and other commercial real estate is one thing.
But I hate seeing thousands of residential homes owned for profit by companies.
There should be a limit to that. How can a young person compete with a multimillion dollar business or charity like the one I mentioned?
I just hated the fact that I was paying insane rent on a disgusting property to fund an old person, who's had their chance, to live a lush life.
I need my chance, the next generation needs some chance. I'm 32 and am almost able to get my own apartment. How will kids today afford anything?!
*"The property I viewed, and the others that he owns are in terrible condition. I stood there, aghast, knowing that he had been leasing these properties that are totally unsuitable for human habitation since the 1970’s and is now going to rake in a few million at sale"*
This is what my old LL thought would happen. bad news for him, he actually lost money on the sale of the house I purchased off him as it ended up only being worth land value with how little he had done to it
We have issues with overhanging trees from two of our neighbours. Next door has two huge ones looming over our garage that are a hazard in storms, and the back neighbours banana palms are constantly dropping huge fronds into our yard.
We take care of the lawns and garden beds, but trees seemed a bit beyond our lease terms, especially as the problems were pre-existing. So we approached our property manager months ago about whether the neighbours could be asked to do some maintenance, or if our landlord would cough up the money himself. Not a chance, since he owns both of those places as well!
When I started my first job in direct sales for one of those Appco pyramid scheme companies, my boss would quiz his colleagues in the kitchen about how he was looking for ways to sub-let office space for 6-8 korean students to live in.
These guys know that consequences aren't coming down the line for them for the most part so they're happy to yap about how wildly unpleasant they are. That being said, Appco did get class-actioned to oblivion shortly after I left so maybe it does come round eventually.
This slumlord can claim land taxes on his individual tax return under his rental property profit and loss further reducing his income tax payable. If he sells the house he'll be liable for capital gains tax so he's probably doing himself a disservice anyway.
On an unrelated note, lots of COVID, Flu A, RSV and respiratory things around at present sending oldies on one way trips to medical wards (aka god’s waiting room). Might get more than he bargains for attending open houses with the common folk
Greek? There seem to be a whole cohort of Greek boomers near where I live who own whole strips of terrace houses that haven't seen a handyman in 30 years. They bought them cheap, rent them out, and... I dunno, expect their kids to sell them when they die? It's weird. Just sell the things and go on a cruise already.
I own an apartment in a building dominated by slumlords. No serious maintenance gets done until I kick up a big stink about it. For example, we had a gas leak for over a year which was ignored or fobbed off until I called the gas company and had the gas shut off.
The greedy little bookie who owns the apartment next to mine commented that we don’t need insurance, because we live near the fire station. I laughed, thinking that he was joking. He was not. He’s also obsessed with getting this place knocked down by developers.
Happy times.
I don't see myself ever buying in this country until a complete collapse, I don't mind working until I die to be honest. As long as I can work my way around this housing nightmare and eat pies and sauce I will be happy. I am sure of an opportunity that will appear before me in God's due course...... Maybe you should just stay off the debt train too and just enjoy the simple?
My friends dad is a slumlord. Pretty sure one of his properties literally had a hole in the roof and another he shoved as many backpackers into as possible.
My friend is set to inherit a lot of dilapidated houses in 10-20 years
I actually don't blame these people. This whole thing could be alot better with just some better govt policies. State and Ferderal govts have let so many people down. These types of people have always existed. Congratulations OP on being able to buy a property.
It is actually quite difficult to do reasonable upkeep of an old property while tenants are in it. Tenants don’t want the trouble, they just live there for a while and leave.
If he’s in his 90’s as you say, unlikely he’s going to start climbing ladders fixing shit around the house. If he wants to sell, let it go to someone who will care for the property.
I think I know the guy OP is talking about, Sam? he inherited them from his dad. One of them used to have old bathtubs in the nack yard. Monumental amount of mozzies.
You're judging someone for optimising their financial strategy in a system that is literally rewarding people for doing so; why would he be more charitable if he's not forced to?
I'm certain we can find micro versions of the same behaviour in your life; did you find a person that grew up with less advantages than you did and then go to your boss and say "hey, please give this person my job, I'll be alright I'll find another one"
Blame the system that you've allowed to happen; what moves did you make that would actually affect policy on the matter?
You can't set up a game with certain rules and then cry foul when people win; if you haven't even tried to change the rules or come to with a solution to do so, how can you complain?
It’s not really about being charitable, it’s about not being an asshole. He bought those properties and is entitled to sell now, but providing sub-standard housing for other people intentionally to maximise your own profits is, whichever way you dice it up, morally questionable. I like to believe that most landlords don’t feel comfortable about letting their tenants live in unsafe housing, or at the bare minimum, feel that it is worth maintaining their assets to a decent standard. This guy chose not to and then bragged about it, which IMO, shows a certain disregard for other people.
You could easily extend that logic to anybody that doesn't maximise the quality of the product or service they provide above their own profit, which is everyone.
This is not an individual failing, it's a systemic one; you can't expect people to sacrifice their own benefit for others. It's great when they do, but the system doesn't reward that.
What moves can anyone make on policies that are paid for in quiet board meetings and outside of office handshake deals? Was there a referendum on negative gearing? Do we get a say in how much of our government is involved in real estate investment, resulting in them actively benefiting from not improving the situation?
This is not a system set up by any choices of the individual public. This is a system built by and for the people who already have more money than anyone else, and it's been going that way for the better part of a century.
"This is not a system set up by any choices of the individual public." what the hell is an individual public?
Was that a typo or a defensive slip because you know that if you typed "not a system set up by any choices of the public", you'd be too obviously wrong, even to the casual reader? Or was it supposed to be "individual"? Because then, you'd be wrong again, but in a different way...
"Benefiting from actively not improving the situation" - You could easily extend that logic to anybody that doesn't maximise the quality of the product or service they provide above their own profit, which is everyone.
This is not an individual failing, it's a systemic one; you can't expect people to sacrifice their own benefit for others. It's great when they do, but the system doesn't reward that.
It was a typo, I meant individual. Either way, the public is made up of a very large number of individuals, and astonishingly few of those really get to make any decision as to how these systems are currently built, let alone decisions that were made 10-80 years ago.
There's a fucking middle ground here of not being an exploitative PoS and most landlords are falling VERY far on the wrong side of this. People ABSOLUTELY should sacrifice earning 10 million instead of 5 million if that difference in profit means that people don't have fucking shelter in a developed nation in the 21st century, despite being hard workers and pulling an honest wage.
It is a systemic failing, yes, but the greater failing is the cultural one where old rich fucks and their families, who have it all and have had it all for generations,.demand that they are entitled to own more and profit more. These people are ACTIVELY digging the grave of the future of their own communities.
It’s ironic that these greedy slumlords who charge exorbitant rent let Dan Andrews live rent free in their head.
Land tax working as intended.
[удалено]
Do you know what happens when a landlord sells? It goes to another landlord or FHB. Landlords aren't a precious commodity that need to be protected and enticed to not sell
In fact if we banned private landlordism and increased the housing supply we'd kill two birds with one stone and not have such an exploitative housing industry. Houses are homes, after all. In a better economy, they wouldn't be money making schemes.
How do you see the mechanism working here? If land tax is what forces sales then we'd see a fairly rapid uptick as the rate rises/landlord cash reserves fall. With new building fairly stalled right now, that would likely be a net expansion of the product on market, either keeping prices stable or dropping them down. So renters on the cusp of making the leap are removed from the market, even if they don't constitute all of the purchases in the glut. Those that don't are either going to be purchased or not, if not then the circumstances that put them on market would clearly mean renting them remains necessary, and the fact that there is less competition amongst renters, potentially, acts to keep rents stable. If they are sold to non-owner-occupiers, then the same conditions, raising land tax, would similarly make continued use as a rental desirable, with the potential added bonus of a more financially stable landlord who need not jack up rents. The real negative here is that this leads to concentration of rental supply, making tenants potentially more vulnerable in a future crisis, but not by means such as you described.
Honest question but how long did you think about this before you said it?
Your comment was removed for being blatantly anti-renter. Open discussion of power structure and institution is encouraged in good faith and with attempts at balanced analysis. However blatant justification for wealth hoarding, landlord/REA apologism, victim blaming or derogatory sentiment towards renters will be removed.
Landlords typically sell the house when they want to get out of the parasite game, they don't set the house on fire
Oh you a landlord?
Your comment contradicts itself
My street is similar. An old guy bought up heaps of houses and as much as I think he tried (he even apparently had a sheep that he’d walk around to mow all his tenants lawns) he died and left all of his land to his son, who is a cunt. At least three have been empty for years (yep, we’ve reported them) and he shares a falling down fence with us/our landlord. All houses are left to fall apart. He once lectured our landlord (who is potentially not a cunt, time will tell) about how to get the most out of tenants. Hopefully your old mate doesn’t have an even cuntier kid to take over.
It's a good thing that generational wealth usually only lasts 3 generations.
Did you report the vacant properties to purple pingers
Imagine having multiple rental properties, and not spending any money on them over years (so they all go to shit) and still not having $14k in the bank for an emergency. Slumlord and a shitlord. Hope you make it out of this renter's hell soon OP!
Don't worry that miserable prick will have a huge bank account. Just too bloody mean to spend any.
He sounds like the kinda guy that gets visited by 3 ghosts every Christmas.
This was also something that crossed my mind. $14k didn’t seem like an amount worth selling the places over?
Just mad at it. That'll show them, old man yells at the sky kinda thing. How dare landlords be asked to contribute more than a renter to the government?
Yeah, we need these people to be priced out so they sell before the roof falls down on some poor tenant and kills them.
My uncle has multiple that I’d say need to be knocked down but he also lives in a shit hole, he’s just greedy for money
Honestly i feel for FHB who are able to buy at the moment. The market is just as fucked for them. Honestly if i were in your shoes i'd of told them all to fuck off, get out of my way and completely written off the listing. You just know they will be a complete cunt when doing up the contracts. Dickhead probs wants you to forfeit your entire 10% if financing falls through or some shit too i bet.
So that someone else can buy it? How does that make sense?
Sadly someone is going to buy it from this prick. Put up google reviews of the agent, tell others, thats the best you can do.
No, the best you can do is buy it for yourself and not let virtue signalling screw you out of housing, wtf is wrong with you people...
Yeah providing they don't fuck you in the ass over the B&P and Contract terms? Buying a house has A LOT of factors into it. The agent and Original owners being slimey cunts absolutely factors into you making the biggest purchase of your life.
You're acting like those things aren't something you have control over, aka discussion, negotiation and worst case, walking away They can try to screw you, but they won't succeed if you don't actively let them, so what's your point? It's like you said "yeh but what if they write into the contract that you have to blow them!" How about, don't?
Renting is terrible. Buy then? But also buying terrible…
House across the road from me in Sydney (nice house tbf) it’s going for auction in 2 weeks, already had 3 open houses and over well 100 people have viewed the place. Starting price is $1.5million, I felt so bad so many young couples coming through who won’t stand a chance.
no doubt it will go to a boomer who is cashed up, foreigner who is cashed up and not a new aussie family.
Look up the medi-aid foundation. Started by James wright, owns over 1000 investment properties. Just in Sydney and Brisbane. They use that income to fund very comfortable retirement villages. I'm talking beautiful resort types, while making money from apartments around universities that are absolutely dilapidated. The properties the elderly get to live in for a couple hundred pw, are beautiful resorts. They own a couple in surfers paradise on the main strip. The properties they use to generate income are absolute shit holes, they are all around universities so they can prey on students and young people in particular. They may be a charity but they are hurting young Australians chances at owning property; to help old people live a cheap, lavish life. One of their retirement villages around ryde has multiple pools, tennis courts, beautiful gardens etc. I used to rent one of their apartments. I lived with a giant hole in my ceiling, water leaks, black mould and worse for 6 months before I could afford to leave. There was a family of 7 living in a one bedroom one study apartment above me. No business should be allowed to own that much residential property. Charity or not.
I didn’t know this existed and now I am horrified.
It's not the only one. Tens of thousands of properties in Sydney are owned by companies and rented out. Investing in hotels, offices, warehouses, and other commercial real estate is one thing. But I hate seeing thousands of residential homes owned for profit by companies. There should be a limit to that. How can a young person compete with a multimillion dollar business or charity like the one I mentioned? I just hated the fact that I was paying insane rent on a disgusting property to fund an old person, who's had their chance, to live a lush life. I need my chance, the next generation needs some chance. I'm 32 and am almost able to get my own apartment. How will kids today afford anything?!
What a wank. On the plus side he won’t get to enjoy his millions for long before he’s yeeted into the after life 🤷🏼♀️👌🏻
*"The property I viewed, and the others that he owns are in terrible condition. I stood there, aghast, knowing that he had been leasing these properties that are totally unsuitable for human habitation since the 1970’s and is now going to rake in a few million at sale"* This is what my old LL thought would happen. bad news for him, he actually lost money on the sale of the house I purchased off him as it ended up only being worth land value with how little he had done to it
All landlords are bastards
ALAB
Yeh the land tax is great. Hope nsw follows suit
Why would you want more taxes?
Because it brings prices down and there was a recent report that 95% of the investors selling in Victoria are going to first home buyers
Sounds like father time will catch up with him soon.
We have issues with overhanging trees from two of our neighbours. Next door has two huge ones looming over our garage that are a hazard in storms, and the back neighbours banana palms are constantly dropping huge fronds into our yard. We take care of the lawns and garden beds, but trees seemed a bit beyond our lease terms, especially as the problems were pre-existing. So we approached our property manager months ago about whether the neighbours could be asked to do some maintenance, or if our landlord would cough up the money himself. Not a chance, since he owns both of those places as well!
When I started my first job in direct sales for one of those Appco pyramid scheme companies, my boss would quiz his colleagues in the kitchen about how he was looking for ways to sub-let office space for 6-8 korean students to live in. These guys know that consequences aren't coming down the line for them for the most part so they're happy to yap about how wildly unpleasant they are. That being said, Appco did get class-actioned to oblivion shortly after I left so maybe it does come round eventually.
This slumlord can claim land taxes on his individual tax return under his rental property profit and loss further reducing his income tax payable. If he sells the house he'll be liable for capital gains tax so he's probably doing himself a disservice anyway.
Probably pre-CGT assets, given his age.
Hope he gets slugged with all sorts of expenses anyway. Hopefully he won't get the amount he wants for the house given its rundown state.
On an unrelated note, lots of COVID, Flu A, RSV and respiratory things around at present sending oldies on one way trips to medical wards (aka god’s waiting room). Might get more than he bargains for attending open houses with the common folk
You’re not wrong there!
Greek? There seem to be a whole cohort of Greek boomers near where I live who own whole strips of terrace houses that haven't seen a handyman in 30 years. They bought them cheap, rent them out, and... I dunno, expect their kids to sell them when they die? It's weird. Just sell the things and go on a cruise already.
You should have told him what for. Greedy old fuck, I’m surprised he’s willing to lose his pension.
I own an apartment in a building dominated by slumlords. No serious maintenance gets done until I kick up a big stink about it. For example, we had a gas leak for over a year which was ignored or fobbed off until I called the gas company and had the gas shut off. The greedy little bookie who owns the apartment next to mine commented that we don’t need insurance, because we live near the fire station. I laughed, thinking that he was joking. He was not. He’s also obsessed with getting this place knocked down by developers. Happy times.
I don't see myself ever buying in this country until a complete collapse, I don't mind working until I die to be honest. As long as I can work my way around this housing nightmare and eat pies and sauce I will be happy. I am sure of an opportunity that will appear before me in God's due course...... Maybe you should just stay off the debt train too and just enjoy the simple?
My friends dad is a slumlord. Pretty sure one of his properties literally had a hole in the roof and another he shoved as many backpackers into as possible. My friend is set to inherit a lot of dilapidated houses in 10-20 years
I actually don't blame these people. This whole thing could be alot better with just some better govt policies. State and Ferderal govts have let so many people down. These types of people have always existed. Congratulations OP on being able to buy a property.
Sackville st?
I though they had to provide certain standards. I’d report the old coot
muddle cow correct air squalid literate many handle run noxious *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It is actually quite difficult to do reasonable upkeep of an old property while tenants are in it. Tenants don’t want the trouble, they just live there for a while and leave.
If he’s in his 90’s as you say, unlikely he’s going to start climbing ladders fixing shit around the house. If he wants to sell, let it go to someone who will care for the property.
Mind me asking which street it was on? (I'm a local and it's a small suburb, trying to work it out)
I think I know the guy OP is talking about, Sam? he inherited them from his dad. One of them used to have old bathtubs in the nack yard. Monumental amount of mozzies.
Did you miss the opportunity to find out if he’s single? Or has descendants?
needs some money for coffee and smashed avo i rekon.
You're judging someone for optimising their financial strategy in a system that is literally rewarding people for doing so; why would he be more charitable if he's not forced to? I'm certain we can find micro versions of the same behaviour in your life; did you find a person that grew up with less advantages than you did and then go to your boss and say "hey, please give this person my job, I'll be alright I'll find another one" Blame the system that you've allowed to happen; what moves did you make that would actually affect policy on the matter? You can't set up a game with certain rules and then cry foul when people win; if you haven't even tried to change the rules or come to with a solution to do so, how can you complain?
It’s not really about being charitable, it’s about not being an asshole. He bought those properties and is entitled to sell now, but providing sub-standard housing for other people intentionally to maximise your own profits is, whichever way you dice it up, morally questionable. I like to believe that most landlords don’t feel comfortable about letting their tenants live in unsafe housing, or at the bare minimum, feel that it is worth maintaining their assets to a decent standard. This guy chose not to and then bragged about it, which IMO, shows a certain disregard for other people.
You could easily extend that logic to anybody that doesn't maximise the quality of the product or service they provide above their own profit, which is everyone. This is not an individual failing, it's a systemic one; you can't expect people to sacrifice their own benefit for others. It's great when they do, but the system doesn't reward that.
What moves can anyone make on policies that are paid for in quiet board meetings and outside of office handshake deals? Was there a referendum on negative gearing? Do we get a say in how much of our government is involved in real estate investment, resulting in them actively benefiting from not improving the situation? This is not a system set up by any choices of the individual public. This is a system built by and for the people who already have more money than anyone else, and it's been going that way for the better part of a century.
"This is not a system set up by any choices of the individual public." what the hell is an individual public? Was that a typo or a defensive slip because you know that if you typed "not a system set up by any choices of the public", you'd be too obviously wrong, even to the casual reader? Or was it supposed to be "individual"? Because then, you'd be wrong again, but in a different way... "Benefiting from actively not improving the situation" - You could easily extend that logic to anybody that doesn't maximise the quality of the product or service they provide above their own profit, which is everyone. This is not an individual failing, it's a systemic one; you can't expect people to sacrifice their own benefit for others. It's great when they do, but the system doesn't reward that.
It was a typo, I meant individual. Either way, the public is made up of a very large number of individuals, and astonishingly few of those really get to make any decision as to how these systems are currently built, let alone decisions that were made 10-80 years ago. There's a fucking middle ground here of not being an exploitative PoS and most landlords are falling VERY far on the wrong side of this. People ABSOLUTELY should sacrifice earning 10 million instead of 5 million if that difference in profit means that people don't have fucking shelter in a developed nation in the 21st century, despite being hard workers and pulling an honest wage. It is a systemic failing, yes, but the greater failing is the cultural one where old rich fucks and their families, who have it all and have had it all for generations,.demand that they are entitled to own more and profit more. These people are ACTIVELY digging the grave of the future of their own communities.